Repeated exposure of coyotes to the coyote lure operative device

Wildlife Society Bulletin

Volumn 34, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 809-814

  Berentsen, Are R ^a   Schmidt, Robert H ^a   Timm, Robert M ^b  

^a UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Hopland Res and Extension Center   (United States)

Author keywords

Behavior; Canis latrans; CLOD; Coyote; Coyote lure operative device; Depredation; Domestic livestock; Operant learning

Indexed keywords

CANID; FEEDING BEHAVIOR; LEARNING; PREDATOR CONTROL;

ANIMALIA; CANIDAE; CANIS LATRANS;

EID: 33751246474     PISSN: 00917648     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2193/0091-7648(2006)34[809:REOCTT]2.0.CO;2     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Andelt, W. F. 1996. Carnivores. Pages 133-155 in P. R. Krausman, editor. Rangeland wildlife. The Society for Range Management, Denver, Colorado, USA.
2. Andelt, W. F., C. E. Harris, and F. F. Knowlton. 1985. Prior trap experience might bias coyote responses to scent stations. Southwestern Naturalist 30:317-318.
3. Barnum, D. A., D. B. Fagre, and R. E. Marsh. 1982. Hopland tests of bait delivery devices. Pages 14-16 in Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Western Regional Coordinating Committee (WRCC-26), 10-11 August 1982, Waco, Texas, USA.
4. Belant, J. L., T. W. Seamans, and L. A. Tyson. 1998. Evaluation of electronic frightening devices as white-tailed deer deterrents. Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 18:107-110.
5. Berentsen, A. R. 2004. Behavioral responses of coyotes to the Coyote Lure Operative Device. Thesis, Utah State University, Logan, USA.
6. Berentsen, A. R., R. H. Schmidt, and R. M. Timm. 2004. Behavioral responses of coyotes to the CLOD in familiar and unfamiliar environments. Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 21:58-63.
7. Bromley, C., and E. M. Gese. 2001. Surgical sterilization as a method of reducing coyote predation on domestic sheep. Journal of Wildlife Management 65:510-519.
8. Buseck, A. R. 2004. Development of a coyote (Canis latrans) specific delivery system for oral contraceptives. Thesis, University of Wyoming, Laramie, USA.
9. Conner, M. M., M. M. Jaeger, T. J. Weller, and D. R. McCullough. 1998. Effect of coyote removal on sheep depredation in northern California. Journal of Wildlife Management 62:690-699.
10. Connolly, G. 1982. On cost effectiveness of coyote control to protect livestock. Pages 279-294 in J. M. Peek and P. D. Dalke, editors. Wildlife-livestock relationships symposium: proceedings 10. University of Idaho, Forest, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station, Moscow, USA.
11. Connolly, G. E., and W. M. Longhurst. 1975. The effects of control on coyote populations. University of California Division of Agricultural Sciences Bulletin 1872.
12. Day, R. W., and G. P. Quinn. 1989. Comparisons of treatments after an analysis of variance in ecology. Ecological Monographs 59:433-463.
13. DeLiberto, T. J., E. M. Gese, F. F. Knowlton, J. R. Mason, M. R. Conover, L. Miller, R. H. Schmidt, and M. K. Holland. 1998. Fertility control in coyotes: is it a potential management tool? Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 18:144-149.
14. Duff, J. 2001. Reintroduction of whooping cranes: the ultra (light) in animal training experience. American Association of Zoos and Aquariums Communiqué 12:14-15, 18-19.
15. Ebbert, S. M. 1988. Field evaluation and improvement of a new system for delivering substances to coyotes. Thesis, Texas A&M University, College Station, USA.
16. Ebbert, S. M., and D. B. Fagre. 1987. Importance of attractant qualities for improving a new coyote delivery system. Proceedings of the Great Plains Wildlife Damage Control Workshop 8:189-194.
17. Fagre, D. B., and S. M. Ebbert. 1988. Development and testing of the coyote lure operative device. Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 13:235-240.
18. Glahn, J. F. 2000. Comparison of pyrotechnics versus shooting for dispersing double-crested cormorants from their night roosts. Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 19:44-48.
19. Gorenzel, W. P., and T. P. Salmon. 1993. Tape-recorded calls disperse American crows from urban roosts. Wildlife Society Bulletin 21:334-338.
20. Harris, C. E., and F. F. Knowlton. 2001. Differential responses of coyotes to novel stimuli in familiar and unfamiliar settings. Canadian Journal of Zoology 79:2005-2013.
21. Heffernen, D. J. 2001. Evaluation of multiple cues for increasing attraction of coyotes. Thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, USA.
22. Hein, E. W., and W. F. Andelt. 1994. Evaluation of coyote attractants and an oral delivery device for chemical agents. Wildlife Society Bulletin 22:651-655.
23. Johnston, J. J. 2005. Evaluation of cocoa- and coffee-derived methyxanthines as toxicants for the control of pest coyotes. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 53:4069-4075.
24. Kimball, B. A., J. J. Johnston, J. R. Mason, D. E. Zemlicka, and F. S. Blom. 2000. Development of chemical coyote attractants for wildlife management applications. Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 19:304-309.
25. Knowlton, F. F., E. M. Gese, and M. M. Jaeger. 1999. Coyote depredation control: an interface between biology and management. Journal of Range Management 52:398-412.
26. Koehler, A. E., R. E. Marsh, and T. P. Salmon. 1990. Frightening methods and devices/stimuli to prevent mammal damage-a review. Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 14:168-173.
27. Marsh, R. E., W. E. Howard, S. M. McKenna, B. Butler, and D. A. Barnum. 1982. A new system for delivery of predacides or other active ingredients for coyote management. Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 10:229-233.
28. Mason, J. R., and J. E. McConnell. 1997. Hedonic responsiveness of coyotes to 15 aqueous taste solutions. Journal of Wildlife Research 2:21-24.
29. Nass, R. D., and F. F. Knowlton. 2004. Tallow bait acceptance by coyotes in southwest Texas. U.S. Department of Agriculture National Wildlife Research Center Final Report QA-106, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.
30. Phillips, R. L., R. S. Blom, and R. M. Engeman. 1990. Responses of captive coyotes to chemical attractants. Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 14:285-289.
31. Sacks, B. N., K. M. Blejwas, and M. M. Jaeger. 1999a. Relative vulnerability of coyotes to removal methods on a northern California ranch. Journal of Wildlife Management 63:939-949.
32. Sacks, B. N., M. M. Jaeger, J. C. C. Neale, and D. R. McCullough. 1999b. Territoriality and breeding status of coyotes relative to sheep predation. Journal of Wildlife Management 63:593-605.
33. SAS Institute. 2002. SAS/STAT user's guide. Version 9.0. SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina, USA.
34. Seamans, T. W., B. F. Blackwell, and J. T. Gansowski. 2002. Evaluation of the Allsopp Helikite as a bird scaring device. Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 20:129-134.
35. Seglund, A. E., T. DeLiberto, and B. Kimball. 2000. Evaluation of cabergoline as a reproductive inhibitor for coyotes (Canis latrans). Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 19:319-324.
36. Sequin, E. S., M. M. Jaeger, P. F. Brussard, and R. H. Barrett. 2003. Wariness of coyotes to camera traps relative to social status and territory boundaries. Canadian Journal of Zoology 81:2015-2025.
37. Shealer, D. A., J. P. Snyder, V. C. Dreisbach, D. F. Sunderlin, and J. A. Novak. 1999. Foraging patterns of eastern gray squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis) on goldenrod gall insects, a potentially important winter food resource. American Midland Naturalist 142:102-109.
38. Shumake, S. A. 1995. Electronic rodent repellent devices: a review of efficacy test protocols and regulatory actions. Pages 253-270 in Repellents in wildlife management: proceedings of a symposium, 8-10 August 1995, Denver, Colorado, USA.
39. Skinner, B. F. 1938. The behavior of organisms. Copley, Acton, Massachusetts, USA.
40. Stoddart, L. C., R. E. Griffiths, and F. F. Knowlton. 2001. Coyote responses to changing jackrabbit abundance affect sheep predation. Journal of Range Management 54:15-20.
41. Till, J. A., and F. F. Knowlton. 1983. Efficacy of denning in alleviating coyote depredations upon domestic sheep. Journal of Wildlife Management 47:1018-1025.
42. Timm, R. M., and G. E. Connolly. 2001. Sheep-killing coyotes: a continuing dilemma for ranchers. California Agriculture 55:26-31.
43. Timm, R. M., and T. P. Salmon. 2005. Trends in wildlife damage management in North America. Outlooks on Pest Management 16:215-219.
44. Wagner, F. H. 1988. Predator control and the sheep industry. Regina, Claremont, California, USA.
45. Windberg, L. A. 1996. Coyote responses to visual and olfactory stimuli related to familiarity with an area. Canadian Journal of Zoology 74:2248-2253.
46. Windberg, L. A., and F. F. Knowlton. 1990. Relative vulnerability of coyotes to some capture procedures. Wildlife Society Bulletin 18:282-290.